I remember crysis working well on systems at lower settings than the max. I'd rather have a game have better graphics and demand more, but has the option to lower the graphics and still look great for PCs who can't handle the maximum

as for Crysis 3 not impressed. just another console port with tacked on DX11

Click to expand...

The implementation of DX11 on Crysis 2 was truly shocking. I have no idea how they thought they'd get away with launching it like that.
I have lost all respect for the studio and will not be buying any more of their games unless they actually start to give a shit about the PC market.

most PC gamers will disagree with you if they didnt want better graphics and pushing the envelope they would use consoles and stay their lol if you dont want demanding games buy a PS3 or 360 PC gaming is smaller for a reason its expensive, but then again if you pay for the experience you get a better one.

I love having demanding games as long as they have something to show for it. They can not be inefficient. They must actually do something with all that extra grunt to make it worth it. That way I feel like I am getting my moneys worth out of my computer.

Crysis 1 was demanding, i couldn´t play it maxed out with my old 8800GTS, but i looked really good then, now my current PC can run it maxed out and it still look gorgeous like if it was released yesterday. Crysis 2 on the other hand runs pretty much maxed out in my current PC, and although it looks great in certain levels, it don´t have that wow! effect crysis 1 had, and still has IMO.
I rather play a game that push the envelope, and make my PC sweat, and if i have to upgrade my PC i will.
By the way Metro 2033 runs great in my PC, and in my friends PC (e8400 with 9800GT), just turn off DoF, and go to Nvidia CP and activate FXAA and Adaptive Vertical sync.

no. i dont agree with having demanding games. Look at Darksiders. its so optimized.

why cant all games be like that?

Yes i bought an overclocked GTX 670 2GB but i was FORCED to buy it. Nvidia FORCED me to buy it.

They passively forced me. and again, I bought an i5 2500k CPU but it was because Intel actually FORCED me to buy it.

So i didnt buy my PC parts at my own will. I bought them because i was passively forced to.

Actually Intel and Nvidia have been forcing me to buy their products all these years.....

Click to expand...

Good laugh this is.

No one is forcing you to even buy a PC never mind the components. It's you who chose you want to crank all the fancy details to high.

I still run my 5870 that I bought for 300€, and it has no problems running any games (I came to the 5870 from a X850XT !!!)

You need to adapt the purchase to your needs, if you need a CPU for heavy rendering you won't buy a dual core. Same thing when it comes to games, people still run Q6600's with no issues whatsoever, is it slower than 2500K? Yes it is, but you can still use it for gaming with no problems.

I agree with games needing more optimization to take the advantage of the modern hardware, and making the game very demanding is a plus because NVIDIA/AMD will try to push the GPU tech to make it run smoothly.
As a matter of fact you can see how games today aren't demanding at all and the GPU's aren't even pushed to their full potential and you basically wasted money on them.

To sum it up, having a very demanding game and using medium settings for graphics is still a lot better than having shite console ported games on high settings.